Legal Opinion

MacCormac v. Murphy

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 5, 1948PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilkins, J.

In this action of tort for the conversion of pigs the principal question is whether the defendant, who purchased the pigs from one Flynn after the plaintiff had filed a bill in equity against Flynn, Flynn’s wife, and the owner of the premises where the pigs were kept, was bound by certain facts litigated and determined in that suit. See MacCormac v. Flynn, 313 Mass. 547. This involves a subordinate question as to whether one fact so litigated and determined was that the plaintiff was the owner of all the pigs on the premises. The judge ruled favorably to the plaintiff in these respects, and…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Old Dominion Copper Mining & Smelting Co. v. BigelowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
  2. Chase National Bank v. City of NorwalkSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  3. Old Colony Trust Co. v. City of OmahaSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  4. Dull v. BlackmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  5. Institution for Savings in Newburyport & Its Vicinity v. PufferMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Wishnewsky v. Town of SaugusMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
  2. Henchey v. CoxMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1965
  3. Gozzo v. City Packing Co.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1973

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API